|
On September 06 2012 13:50 slOosh wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2012 13:40 BlackMamba24 wrote:
yeah that was all really messed up, sorry. I was angry because it seemed to me that everyone was ready to just let ottox slide, you never really gave any reason for anything you said. You voted for Mattchew pre-palmar (still doesn't give you any town cred) and then didn't post until the night comes. I don't really think you're in a position to point fingers at people for lurking considering that.
What's wrong with questioning BloodyC0bblers alignment, do you know his alignment? Because I don't. You are right with the lurking - I got caught up with my little thing with DYH and haven't been lucid with my full reasonings behind each accusation. I do not however think it warrants misinterpretation or discrediting like that. There is nothing wrong about questioning BC's alignment, but you flat out said the Mattchew thing is alignment-inconclusive. This is beyond what I consider "healthy" paranoia, but that may be because you know what scum BC is capable of. Additionally I still don't see where you say "my read of Maverick was a misunderstanding", nor how that is the logical flow of reading the related posts.
I've been thinking about it. It's inconclusive and BC isn't cleared by any means. Mattchew could have been an intentional bus. I was very sure that it was when the night started but since I've thought about it more I don't. The reason I no longer think it was a bus was because Mattchew did lightly defend himself early on but was passive about it, as though he were setting up for others to defend him later. If they were scumbuddies together, they would have put on more of a show than that.
The Maverick thing went like this.
1. Night is over, I'm convinced ottoxlol is scum
2. Can't believe how many people are saying ottoxlol shouldn't get lynched or hit/etc.
3. Had my suspicions earlier about Bill Murray and remember him going in on DoYouHas and Maverick32x (specifically after I did, on both of them iirc)
4. Saw other people say the same stuff about Maverick.
5. Assume they are parroting BM (I overlooked his post where he retracted his accusation against Maverick) and I feel this may be a way of defending ottoxlol.
Hopefully that clears up my train of thought a little more. I'm all over the place and rarely take it upon myself to ever explain to town why my reads change when they do or when I change my mind. Whoever it was that came out with a case against Maverick did so fairly convincingly and I'll have to reread Maverick's meta to be sure. Basically, I think Milton/Maverick/Gravan/etc. all deserve a good look but there is such a thing as priorities.
@Haupa, You're prioritizing Milton because he attacked you and argued with you. Take the blinders off. You misread me in Death Note Mafia and made a terrible terrible case against HiroPro and you never seem to know when to drop it or prioritize. I understand you think ottox is just too bad or too disruptive to be scum but other people have come in and explained it pretty adequately. If I were scum, I'd advise him that he has to roll with it. Since no one besides me really and BC are pushing him, he could easily get out of it.
If BC/BM someone who knows me well is scum, they know I can't stand it when people attack me. It always throws me off majorly. I feel like Ottoxlol is an agent of disruption. And I know I'm a broken record here but LISTEN.
When townies make arguments or ask questions, they are curious. They are looking for answers or trying to get responses from people that indicate a certain alignment. That is not ottoxlol's intention. His intention goes far beyond "I think Mattchew is town so we shouldn't lynch him."
He provides very shaky reasons for Mattchew not being able to be scum that had already been set-up for him by others who speculated that Mattchew could be making a bad town aligned or third-party play. I thought he sounded pro-town when he brought up how other lynches like this gave little to no information but he kept on saying something very key (and I'm paraphrasing)
"You're lynching Mattchew for lying. However, no one has provided reasons as to why his lies or behavior are actually scummy."
Now, this isn't true. I provided them personally here:
On September 04 2012 20:46 BlackMamba24 wrote:
Oh, some suspicious notes about Mattchew before I go to bed
1) never outright accuses BC of lying and doesn't OMGUS at all, takes passive role in defending himself. result of implicit guilt?
2) hints at the fact that he might be blue without outright claiming. if he has reason to suspect BC is right he knows he's getting lynched and needs to claim right away. scum, unlike someone who is actually blue, need a considerable amount of time to think about a second claim and plan with the mafia, his posts during the time i was arguing with BC read to me like he was stalling while trying to think of something
3) by saying that BC must have PM'd Palmar he's basically admitting that BC is right that he was lying but yet does not actually defend himself for it which seems tbh really strange to me from both a town and scum motivation. he says "devils advocate" when he comes up with a town motivated scenario for lying as though he's trying to just tell BC what he is doing so he will drop it
i guess it comes down to what mattchew claims now
if he flips blue then that doesn't tell me anything about anyone else here really except for people who didn't say anything about mattchew until after palmar confirmed the bit about the nosy neighbor so i guess we will just have to take it as a lesson for blues from now on to be a bit more careful
i really just don't understand #3 but i have seen scum kinda give up when they get caught in lies before or martyr themselves so maybe it isn't so strange after all
Here I provide 3 odd behaviors of Mattchew that tell me he does not have a town aligned role. This is what Ottox was asking for. Other people gave other reasons, how the claim makes sense as scum because he's preemptively defending himself from a tracker whereas blue gains nothing from it except maaaaaaaaaaybe a tracker, but a tracker would defend himself, claim he was tracker, and try his best not to get lynched.
There were always other reasons. Other people kept telling him. But he never listened. He ignored that, insulted everyone who responded to him.
THEN Mattchew flips red. And instead of admitting he was wrong, he acts as though his shit doesn't stink and we're all a bunch of idiots. Not to mention misrepresenting me as a lurker or a person who voted without reason. I am if I'm not mistaken the person who went the furthest out of their way to justify the vote for Mattchew because simply lies are not enough.
SIMILARLY
Lurking is NOT a scumtell. Lurkers who behave scummily or with clearly mafia-aligned intentions are probably scum. Who else lurks?
Blues
Ninjas
Scared Newbies
People who are actually just busy
Be careful that you're not lynching one of those people. Yes, I think there are quite a few lurking/low post count scum. Look at the meta and more importantly, the content of the posts. Someone could just be busier than they were in a previous game or trying to post less but look at the way they attack people, they way they build their cases, etc. look for differences in psychology and behavior. Post count is just a number.
|
idk why i said similarly there at all
|
My 2 cents about the Ottox thing. I played with him in Area 53 and he's as stubborn as a mule. I could see him trying to derail a lynch from a town perspective. I just don't get why as town he wont push a lynch canidate (in all seriousness his isn't doing much to push toad or hapa). That's why Im keeping a scum read on him.
|
|
|
Lurker albeit but what he has posted is scummy as fuck.
On September 04 2012 18:22 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 18:17 Palmar wrote:
Just like with any other normal miller role, nosy neighbours do not know they are nosy neighbours whoa what? Just got back into this thread. I'll read through it later (when I wake up) but for now, ##Vote Mattchew
Votes for Mattchew...
On September 05 2012 05:20 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 05:12 grush57 wrote:
Well, looks like Mattchew slipped and all the noobs on his team are now scrambling.
So....
##Vote: Mattchew
Miltonkram after this lynch?(Assuming that Mattchew flips scum which he will) Why are you piling on Miltonkram? AFAIK you didn't even offer a single post on the entire Mattchew debacle and now you're trying to chainsaw defend Hapa by drawing associative scumtells?
Ravages Grush for voting for Mattchew?! As far as I can see, you put in as much input on the Mattchew debacle as him, considering you talked to him about it(clicky). At that point it didn't even matter cause he got caught with a scummy fakeclaim.
Other than that he's supported lynching lurkers and publicly announcing blue actions.
|
It was later in the game from what I remember, just that he doesn't really listen (or ignores) others logic.
|
Yeah but look here:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=329128&user=124671¤tpage=5
He's at least nice about it. "I'm frustrated that no one seems to be reading my posts."
The attitude is way different. filter
Good case, I can understand your reasoning.
He actually tries well and immediately to defend himself when he comes under suspicion. In this game he deflects it with insults and goes absent. The gameplay and meta is totally way different. How can you not see that?
|
Actually, thanks for pointing out his meta. It's completely damning.
As town ottoxlol is not very aggressive, tries to be helpful and defends himself very actively. In this game he is very aggressive and extremely negative, gets caught up in arguments with a completely different attitude/tone. In Area Mafia he asks questions, seems to listen to other peoples posts, makes a lot of posts addressing general points rather than picking people apart and discrediting them.
Ottox has done nothing to defend himself in this thread.
On April 24 2012 20:48 Ottoxlol wrote:
From "area mafia":
And insulting the other instead of arguing will help a lot, good tactic. Next you will claim JK right?
Interesting.
Anyway, vig hit ottox.
|
Grush, if everyone in this game were a toaster, who would be the most energy-efficient? The quickest to make toast? The most likely to burn down a house?
|
On September 06 2012 16:16 BlackMamba24 wrote:Actually, thanks for pointing out his meta. It's completely damning. As town ottoxlol is not very aggressive, tries to be helpful and defends himself very actively. In this game he is very aggressive and extremely negative, gets caught up in arguments with a completely different attitude/tone. In Area Mafia he asks questions, seems to listen to other peoples posts, makes a lot of posts addressing general points rather than picking people apart and discrediting them. Ottox has done nothing to defend himself in this thread. Show nested quote +On April 24 2012 20:48 Ottoxlol wrote:
From "area mafia":
And insulting the other instead of arguing will help a lot, good tactic. Next you will claim JK right? Interesting. Anyway, vig hit ottox.
Regarding Ottox
Meta is a really dangerous road to go down when dealing with this type of player methinks. It's very easy to pick out the differences when his overall mentality seems the same to me. Being aggressive/angry isn't mafia-oriented. Think about it from his perspective; he thought he was being reasonable ("helping town discussion"), and a bunch of people railed on him for pages. That would make anyone angry/aggressive/whatever. Also, not defending ones-self when emotional is pretty understandable.
In fact, there are parts of his meta that go to his favor; his stubbornness, his activity level, etc.
This is the last I'll say on Ottox, but I'll restate my main point one more time:
"Mafia Ottox" would have known Mattchew's alignment. Given this, it makes no sense for Ottox to hard-defend Mattchew after the lie is confirmed. Think about it - you know your teammate is mafia, and you know the entire thread knows he fakeclaimed. He just lost a member of your team, and his first impulse is to hard defend him?! Not only that, but to roll with it for pages?!
Blinders man. Blinders.
Regarding Miltonkram
Let's talk about a hypothetical player within the factual setting of this game. The player's filter consists of:
- A fluff-intro post talking about his meta
- A couple of questions he never pursues
- A vote on the confirmed-scum, followed by a bad case against another player in the same post
- When backing down from bad case, he passively questions another player pointed out to him w/out taking a stance
- General lurkiness (11 total posts, most of which are very short)
I would shoot this hypothetical player on the spot, regardless of who his case was on or whatever. There are no blinders - this is the only lurker that I can attribute mafia-motive to so far. If you look at his filter, that's exactly how one would expect mafia to react to a buddy getting confirmed scum in the thread:
Fluff intro post --> "lolscumslip" post --> ##Vote post "oh hey this guy is also scummy" post --> "my case is bad, chill out i was tired...errr...can you explain this suspicious thing to me BillMurray?" post
Miltonkram's head needs to roll ASAP
|
On September 06 2012 22:45 Hapahauli wrote:
This is the last I'll say on Ottox, but I'll restate my main point one more time:
"Mafia Ottox" would have known Mattchew's alignment. Given this, it makes no sense for Ottox to hard-defend Mattchew after the lie is confirmed. Think about it - you know your teammate is mafia, and you know the entire thread knows he fakeclaimed. He just lost a member of your team, and his first impulse is to hard defend him?! Not only that, but to roll with it for pages?!
Mattchew Is scum, Mattchew decides to claim nosy neighbour. Nosy Neighbours are not self aware. Why would scum Mattchew do something so obviously retarded?
I don't think that being blatantly idiotic rules someone out from being scum. You need to look at the motivation behind his actions.
Defends matt instinctively, Then realising he is in a bad situation and would look worse if he backed off, proceeds to go full troll mode on the thread, completely suppressing meaningful or useful discussion With many people forced to repeat that matt is scum ad nauseum. Otto ignores all evidence and reason to the point where no rational human being could possibly not understand and yet he continues to state that we are all idiots and that we have not answered his questions.
What possible town motive could you give him for this behaviour. This is blatantly not just some misunderstanding (how could anyone continue to misunderstand after all the explanations)
There is no town motive. But there is scum motive. Crap up the thread. Prevent any discussion other than the Mattchew case, which, lets face it, was pretty much resolved. and hope that being aggressive/Trollish enough that people can't get a read on you.
All this is in stark contrast to his stated motivation which was not defending matt, but to ensure discussion was not lost through an easy lynch. 0_o
He states countless times that he is not defending matt but making sure meaningful discussion occurs (ironic isn't it).
You have not answered me previously so I will ask again. Why are you so intent on defending who you seem to believe to be town Otto? Especially when you have leapt all over other players for far less scummy actions?
|
|
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
I think the general consensus is that Ottox is scum and needs to get vig shot and I've said enough about him already so I'll leave that as is. On to who needs lynching tomorrow.
I'm convinced at this point that Gravan needs lynching. His filter reads like textbook scum tactics.
On September 05 2012 09:38 Gravan wrote:First, the straightforward part. It seems to me that Matt is most likely an assassin, or a very careless player. As many have said before me, there is no case for him to do what he did from a town perspective. To me, it seems that if he were mafia or town, we would likely have seen at least some kind of attempt at an explanation - either to strengthen his fellow mafia by giving them 'towncred' as they jump on his bandwagon or to try to convince us we are making a mistake as a town blue. As an assassin, he could just be seeing his end and giving up - this is of course moot if he decides to put in his piece later. Since he is apparently not a random newbie (who is a random newb, anyway  ?), and clearly likes to be an active player, it shouts assasinto me. Since it is day 1 and we only have so much information, we essentially have to lynch him anyway (even if we were nearly certain he is an assassin. At this time, I'll be throwing my vote his way.
On September 05 2012 13:30 Gravan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 13:00 Hapahauli wrote:
Why is he voting Mattchew if he's convinced he's an assassin? Hell that post doesn't really explain why he's even voting - "we essentially have to lynch him anyway" - wut? This is my fault for wording this sentence poorly. Although I am still leaning towards Matt being an assassin, he certainly looks all kinds of scummy as well. There isn't enough information at this point to lynch someone else - this lynch will, at worst, be neutral. I feel that, unless someone who has better evidence against them comes up (unlikely) we are better off to make this lynch and gain the information (Matt's flip) than sit idle. I am just asserting that I personally think he is an assassin. I'm done on the whole Matt issue now; still working on making my posts more constructive and less parrot-y. If Matt flips scum, Ottox and Toad really need to be looked at. Ottox has been making his bizarre crusade about the potential innocence of Matt, as everyone knows. To me, Toad's last few posts have seemed a little aimless and very personally aggressive with little content. He spends a considerable amount of time shutting down and pointing at Ottox (who is looking obviously scummy or very misguided) in a well written post, then shifts to personal attacks and negligent remarks.
His first post with any content is a soft defence of Matt. Along with Ottox this is meant to take town discussion away from anything useful and focussing it on whether Matt is assassin or scum. The second post is the same soft defence as the first but also starts trying to put Toad under the spotlight. The last part makes no sense because he thinks Toad is scummy for attacking Ottox who he also thinks is scum. The shift from well written to angry attacks isn't due to toad being scummy it's due to Ottox not listening to anybody.
Once everyone piles on Ottox he backs away from this position while Ottox is taking the spotlight. When Matt is lynched and flips red there is no follow up to the previous posts. He avoids the subject entirely hoping it will slip under everyone's radar.
On September 06 2012 10:16 Gravan wrote:I think Bill Murray is scum. Show nested quote +Also, Hapahauli, what is your read on Gravan? Scum or town? I don't want you using the word Null. Pick one. Scum or town? Consider yourself having a Gun to your head. This is the first time he mentions me. At this point, he hasn't put forward any kind of read on me at all. In addition, many of his posts up until this point (not to mention quite a few afterward) are pointless one-liners, or just generally non-contributing. The next thing he does is tell austin to read my filter as if I was scum (again, not argument put forward on his part - he is talking as if me being scum is a forgone conclusion). + Show Spoiler +On September 06 2012 07:18 austinmcc wrote:
Show nested quote +
Looking through his profile, I see his only other game was LIII. So he's at least played, although not with me. But he knows that some of the people in this game played that game, he played with them, he knows they are competent individuals with functioning brains.
It's the first time I've ever seen someone cling to something absolutely wrong in this manner. I have posted paranoid rants in two games, stuck by them for a while as possibilities, gotten upset if people wouldn't consider them as possibilities, but I didn't get like this.
Right now (and if Matt flips scum I will be more certain of the read) I can't help but read the whole thing like this:
Matt got caught
Ottoxlol tried to save him, without realizing how bad an idea it was
Ottoxlol shortly realized how bad an idea it was
A decent scum player told him right after he got caught looking very odd that he couldn't back off his defense, because then he'd look even scummier
So he went full bore nuts, and that's why he won't listen to anyone or anything
It doesn't feel like he's just obtuse. At some point he'd get the message. It feels like he's clinging to this.
Do me a favor, and go read Gravan's filter as if he were a scum idiot Then he goes on to say that hap is on his scumlist for "coaching" me. + Show Spoiler +On September 06 2012 07:23 Hapahauli wrote:
Show nested quote +
Null. Deal with it.
His posts/logic right now could come from either mafia or bad-townie. I don't have enough information to make a decision since hasn't posted much. Fortunately we have 48 hours to make a read on him.
yeah youre on my scum list
so is gravan
you openly coached him Afterwards, he includes doyouhas in this list. + Show Spoiler +filter
On September 06 2012 07:27 imallinson wrote:
Show nested quote +
I'd say Gravan looks real scummy right now. He attempted the same thing as Ottox, defending Matt by saying he was probably an assassin, but much more quietly and backed away as soon as he realised it was a bad idea. If anything that looks more scummy than Ottox at the moment.
THANK YOU.
Go read Gravan's filter, and tell me if you don't find hapa coaching him?
2nd person I've caught him coaching that looks like scum with him (Doyouhas is the other) His next two posts that mention me go on to mention (offhandedly) the apparently obvious need to have me shot by a vig. Further, if you read his filter he is very non-comittal on the otto-defending-matt-and-generally-acting-scummy issue. His posts are passively worded and just softly agree with the flow of the thread at the time.
At this point he has contributed very little and people are starting to notice. So he does what any scum would in that situation and makes a case. The problem is, and what makes the case seem really scummy, the case reads like it is there just to be there, to look like he is contributing. It seems to be entirely based on the fact that BM hasn't contributed much yet which Gravan is more guilty of himself. It reeks of OMGUS. The rest of his few posts are trying to defend this terrible case on BM and some vague mentions of being suspicious of DrH.
|
On September 06 2012 23:53 imallinson wrote:I think the general consensus is that Ottox is scum and needs to get vig shot and I've said enough about him already so I'll leave that as is. On to who needs lynching tomorrow. I'm convinced at this point that Gravan needs lynching. His filter reads like textbook scum tactics. Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 09:38 Gravan wrote:First, the straightforward part. It seems to me that Matt is most likely an assassin, or a very careless player. As many have said before me, there is no case for him to do what he did from a town perspective. To me, it seems that if he were mafia or town, we would likely have seen at least some kind of attempt at an explanation - either to strengthen his fellow mafia by giving them 'towncred' as they jump on his bandwagon or to try to convince us we are making a mistake as a town blue. As an assassin, he could just be seeing his end and giving up - this is of course moot if he decides to put in his piece later. Since he is apparently not a random newbie (who is a random newb, anyway ?), and clearly likes to be an active player, it shouts assasinto me. Since it is day 1 and we only have so much information, we essentially have to lynch him anyway (even if we were nearly certain he is an assassin. At this time, I'll be throwing my vote his way. Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 13:30 Gravan wrote:On September 05 2012 13:00 Hapahauli wrote:
Why is he voting Mattchew if he's convinced he's an assassin? Hell that post doesn't really explain why he's even voting - "we essentially have to lynch him anyway" - wut? This is my fault for wording this sentence poorly. Although I am still leaning towards Matt being an assassin, he certainly looks all kinds of scummy as well. There isn't enough information at this point to lynch someone else - this lynch will, at worst, be neutral. I feel that, unless someone who has better evidence against them comes up (unlikely) we are better off to make this lynch and gain the information (Matt's flip) than sit idle. I am just asserting that I personally think he is an assassin. I'm done on the whole Matt issue now; still working on making my posts more constructive and less parrot-y. If Matt flips scum, Ottox and Toad really need to be looked at. Ottox has been making his bizarre crusade about the potential innocence of Matt, as everyone knows. To me, Toad's last few posts have seemed a little aimless and very personally aggressive with little content. He spends a considerable amount of time shutting down and pointing at Ottox (who is looking obviously scummy or very misguided) in a well written post, then shifts to personal attacks and negligent remarks. His first post with any content is a soft defence of Matt. Along with Ottox this is meant to take town discussion away from anything useful and focussing it on whether Matt is assassin or scum. The second post is the same soft defence as the first but also starts trying to put Toad under the spotlight. The last part makes no sense because he thinks Toad is scummy for attacking Ottox who he also thinks is scum. The shift from well written to angry attacks isn't due to toad being scummy it's due to Ottox not listening to anybody. Once everyone piles on Ottox he backs away from this position while Ottox is taking the spotlight. When Matt is lynched and flips red there is no follow up to the previous posts. He avoids the subject entirely hoping it will slip under everyone's radar. Show nested quote +On September 06 2012 10:16 Gravan wrote:I think Bill Murray is scum. Also, Hapahauli, what is your read on Gravan? Scum or town? I don't want you using the word Null. Pick one. Scum or town? Consider yourself having a Gun to your head. This is the first time he mentions me. At this point, he hasn't put forward any kind of read on me at all. In addition, many of his posts up until this point (not to mention quite a few afterward) are pointless one-liners, or just generally non-contributing. The next thing he does is tell austin to read my filter as if I was scum (again, not argument put forward on his part - he is talking as if me being scum is a forgone conclusion). + Show Spoiler +On September 06 2012 07:18 austinmcc wrote:
Show nested quote +
Looking through his profile, I see his only other game was LIII. So he's at least played, although not with me. But he knows that some of the people in this game played that game, he played with them, he knows they are competent individuals with functioning brains.
It's the first time I've ever seen someone cling to something absolutely wrong in this manner. I have posted paranoid rants in two games, stuck by them for a while as possibilities, gotten upset if people wouldn't consider them as possibilities, but I didn't get like this.
Right now (and if Matt flips scum I will be more certain of the read) I can't help but read the whole thing like this:
Matt got caught
Ottoxlol tried to save him, without realizing how bad an idea it was
Ottoxlol shortly realized how bad an idea it was
A decent scum player told him right after he got caught looking very odd that he couldn't back off his defense, because then he'd look even scummier
So he went full bore nuts, and that's why he won't listen to anyone or anything
It doesn't feel like he's just obtuse. At some point he'd get the message. It feels like he's clinging to this.
Do me a favor, and go read Gravan's filter as if he were a scum idiot Then he goes on to say that hap is on his scumlist for "coaching" me. + Show Spoiler +On September 06 2012 07:23 Hapahauli wrote:
Show nested quote +
Null. Deal with it.
His posts/logic right now could come from either mafia or bad-townie. I don't have enough information to make a decision since hasn't posted much. Fortunately we have 48 hours to make a read on him.
yeah youre on my scum list
so is gravan
you openly coached him Afterwards, he includes doyouhas in this list. + Show Spoiler +filter
On September 06 2012 07:27 imallinson wrote:
Show nested quote +
I'd say Gravan looks real scummy right now. He attempted the same thing as Ottox, defending Matt by saying he was probably an assassin, but much more quietly and backed away as soon as he realised it was a bad idea. If anything that looks more scummy than Ottox at the moment.
THANK YOU.
Go read Gravan's filter, and tell me if you don't find hapa coaching him?
2nd person I've caught him coaching that looks like scum with him (Doyouhas is the other) His next two posts that mention me go on to mention (offhandedly) the apparently obvious need to have me shot by a vig. Further, if you read his filter he is very non-comittal on the otto-defending-matt-and-generally-acting-scummy issue. His posts are passively worded and just softly agree with the flow of the thread at the time. At this point he has contributed very little and people are starting to notice. So he does what any scum would in that situation and makes a case. The problem is, and what makes the case seem really scummy, the case reads like it is there just to be there, to look like he is contributing. It seems to be entirely based on the fact that BM hasn't contributed much yet which Gravan is more guilty of himself. It reeks of OMGUS. The rest of his few posts are trying to defend this terrible case on BM and some vague mentions of being suspicious of DrH.
No where did I say Toad was scummy, I was just trying to focus the discussion elsewhere - at that time, everyone was going on and on about otto, which felt like a dead-horse topic to me.
I suppose I could have also talked about matt, and said something to the effect of "oops, I guess I was wrong". What do you want from me here?
I keep getting harped on for my 'terrible' case on Bill, but I still don't really see why he can aimlessly say I need to get shot and get away with it. From a scum perspective it makes sense to casually try to get townies killed by a vig/mislynch. But, from a townie perspective it makes sense to do what you are doing right now if you want someone to die; you make a reasoned case against them - pulling out all kinds of information in the process.
|
On September 06 2012 14:38 Hapahauli wrote:Well looking at Mav's filter in Aperture Mafia (Townie)... http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=319120&user=174863Maverick is also pretty lurky in the early game, so I don't think his activity is indicative of his alignment. He really doesn't make too many significant contributions until mid-game, and he shows somewhat of a similar mentality to this game - slight pokes and prods, and an objection to an early vote. I'm not sure completely what to make of his "OMGUS" stuff against people who FOS'd him. It still reads as slightly townie to me (calling attention to himself), but he has yet to respond to any significant case against him. I really haven't seen anything in his filters that blatantly goes against his gameplay this game. Leaning town on him, but I hope to get more outta him in the next few days.
Like I said, my mention issue with him is not lurkiness and being defensive, those are just toppings. It's the fact that he mentioned he has a red flag on someone, and did not pursue. His last game, regarding this, doesn't say much, but it does say that he is capable of making cases and establishing arguments, something in which he has not done this game yet, despite accusing someone of being highly suspicious.
|
On September 06 2012 23:02 DarthPunk wrote:
...
You have not answered me previously so I will ask again. Why are you so intent on defending who you seem to believe to be town Otto? Especially when you have leapt all over other players for far less scummy actions?
There is no scum motivation. Think about what the objectives of hard-defending a teammate as mafia are. The goal of hard-defending a teammate is to prevent their lynch. It’s pretty clear that defending someone after they have 20-something votes on them is not going to prevent said lynch, so how can it be a mafia objective? It’s not a mafia objective, it’s screamingly bad townie.
By contrast, If the lynch was close between two candidates, hard-defending makes sense from a mafia perspective. It’s not smart, but there’s mafia-motive.
Regarding the whole “Mattchew was stupid therefore Ottox could be stupid mafia” – that’s a load of BS. As stated above, there’s a huge difference between stupid and mafia-motivated stupid.
So as for your questions: I don’t find Ottox scummy. I see a lot of town motivation (even if stupid) behind his actions.
|
On September 06 2012 23:53 imallinson wrote:I think the general consensus is that Ottox is scum and needs to get vig shot and I've said enough about him already so I'll leave that as is. On to who needs lynching tomorrow. I'm convinced at this point that Gravan needs lynching. His filter reads like textbook scum tactics. Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 09:38 Gravan wrote:First, the straightforward part. It seems to me that Matt is most likely an assassin, or a very careless player. As many have said before me, there is no case for him to do what he did from a town perspective. To me, it seems that if he were mafia or town, we would likely have seen at least some kind of attempt at an explanation - either to strengthen his fellow mafia by giving them 'towncred' as they jump on his bandwagon or to try to convince us we are making a mistake as a town blue. As an assassin, he could just be seeing his end and giving up - this is of course moot if he decides to put in his piece later. Since he is apparently not a random newbie (who is a random newb, anyway ?), and clearly likes to be an active player, it shouts assasinto me. Since it is day 1 and we only have so much information, we essentially have to lynch him anyway (even if we were nearly certain he is an assassin. At this time, I'll be throwing my vote his way. Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 13:30 Gravan wrote:On September 05 2012 13:00 Hapahauli wrote:
Why is he voting Mattchew if he's convinced he's an assassin? Hell that post doesn't really explain why he's even voting - "we essentially have to lynch him anyway" - wut? This is my fault for wording this sentence poorly. Although I am still leaning towards Matt being an assassin, he certainly looks all kinds of scummy as well. There isn't enough information at this point to lynch someone else - this lynch will, at worst, be neutral. I feel that, unless someone who has better evidence against them comes up (unlikely) we are better off to make this lynch and gain the information (Matt's flip) than sit idle. I am just asserting that I personally think he is an assassin. I'm done on the whole Matt issue now; still working on making my posts more constructive and less parrot-y. If Matt flips scum, Ottox and Toad really need to be looked at. Ottox has been making his bizarre crusade about the potential innocence of Matt, as everyone knows. To me, Toad's last few posts have seemed a little aimless and very personally aggressive with little content. He spends a considerable amount of time shutting down and pointing at Ottox (who is looking obviously scummy or very misguided) in a well written post, then shifts to personal attacks and negligent remarks. His first post with any content is a soft defence of Matt. Along with Ottox this is meant to take town discussion away from anything useful and focussing it on whether Matt is assassin or scum. The second post is the same soft defence as the first but also starts trying to put Toad under the spotlight. The last part makes no sense because he thinks Toad is scummy for attacking Ottox who he also thinks is scum. The shift from well written to angry attacks isn't due to toad being scummy it's due to Ottox not listening to anybody. Once everyone piles on Ottox he backs away from this position while Ottox is taking the spotlight. When Matt is lynched and flips red there is no follow up to the previous posts. He avoids the subject entirely hoping it will slip under everyone's radar. Show nested quote +On September 06 2012 10:16 Gravan wrote:I think Bill Murray is scum. Also, Hapahauli, what is your read on Gravan? Scum or town? I don't want you using the word Null. Pick one. Scum or town? Consider yourself having a Gun to your head. This is the first time he mentions me. At this point, he hasn't put forward any kind of read on me at all. In addition, many of his posts up until this point (not to mention quite a few afterward) are pointless one-liners, or just generally non-contributing. The next thing he does is tell austin to read my filter as if I was scum (again, not argument put forward on his part - he is talking as if me being scum is a forgone conclusion). + Show Spoiler +On September 06 2012 07:18 austinmcc wrote:
Show nested quote +
Looking through his profile, I see his only other game was LIII. So he's at least played, although not with me. But he knows that some of the people in this game played that game, he played with them, he knows they are competent individuals with functioning brains.
It's the first time I've ever seen someone cling to something absolutely wrong in this manner. I have posted paranoid rants in two games, stuck by them for a while as possibilities, gotten upset if people wouldn't consider them as possibilities, but I didn't get like this.
Right now (and if Matt flips scum I will be more certain of the read) I can't help but read the whole thing like this:
Matt got caught
Ottoxlol tried to save him, without realizing how bad an idea it was
Ottoxlol shortly realized how bad an idea it was
A decent scum player told him right after he got caught looking very odd that he couldn't back off his defense, because then he'd look even scummier
So he went full bore nuts, and that's why he won't listen to anyone or anything
It doesn't feel like he's just obtuse. At some point he'd get the message. It feels like he's clinging to this.
Do me a favor, and go read Gravan's filter as if he were a scum idiot Then he goes on to say that hap is on his scumlist for "coaching" me. + Show Spoiler +On September 06 2012 07:23 Hapahauli wrote:
Show nested quote +
Null. Deal with it.
His posts/logic right now could come from either mafia or bad-townie. I don't have enough information to make a decision since hasn't posted much. Fortunately we have 48 hours to make a read on him.
yeah youre on my scum list
so is gravan
you openly coached him Afterwards, he includes doyouhas in this list. + Show Spoiler +filter
On September 06 2012 07:27 imallinson wrote:
Show nested quote +
I'd say Gravan looks real scummy right now. He attempted the same thing as Ottox, defending Matt by saying he was probably an assassin, but much more quietly and backed away as soon as he realised it was a bad idea. If anything that looks more scummy than Ottox at the moment.
THANK YOU.
Go read Gravan's filter, and tell me if you don't find hapa coaching him?
2nd person I've caught him coaching that looks like scum with him (Doyouhas is the other) His next two posts that mention me go on to mention (offhandedly) the apparently obvious need to have me shot by a vig. Further, if you read his filter he is very non-comittal on the otto-defending-matt-and-generally-acting-scummy issue. His posts are passively worded and just softly agree with the flow of the thread at the time. At this point he has contributed very little and people are starting to notice. So he does what any scum would in that situation and makes a case. The problem is, and what makes the case seem really scummy, the case reads like it is there just to be there, to look like he is contributing. It seems to be entirely based on the fact that BM hasn't contributed much yet which Gravan is more guilty of himself. It reeks of OMGUS. The rest of his few posts are trying to defend this terrible case on BM and some vague mentions of being suspicious of DrH.
I don't think you have enough there to actually get someone lynched. Correct me if I am wrong, but your strongest argument right there is the soft defense of matt + low contribution? If so, I think you need a better case, because a few people soft defended matt and not many of them have been very useful so far.
The only thing Gravan has yet to answer for is why he voted for mattchew when his biggest theory was that he was an assassin. I've gone over his filter and have not foudn anything.
Regarding Bill Murray, he is a weird player I can't figure anything out of yet. He mostly hints at contributing asking questions as if we were to guess his thoughts, and occasionally actually says something. This can be both a townie trying to confirm his theories by fishing it out of others, or a scum not wanting to commit to any real case. I don't think he should be the focus right now.
|
On September 07 2012 00:39 Z-BosoN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2012 14:38 Hapahauli wrote:Well looking at Mav's filter in Aperture Mafia (Townie)... http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=319120&user=174863Maverick is also pretty lurky in the early game, so I don't think his activity is indicative of his alignment. He really doesn't make too many significant contributions until mid-game, and he shows somewhat of a similar mentality to this game - slight pokes and prods, and an objection to an early vote. I'm not sure completely what to make of his "OMGUS" stuff against people who FOS'd him. It still reads as slightly townie to me (calling attention to himself), but he has yet to respond to any significant case against him. I really haven't seen anything in his filters that blatantly goes against his gameplay this game. Leaning town on him, but I hope to get more outta him in the next few days. Like I said, my mention issue with him is not lurkiness and being defensive, those are just toppings. It's the fact that he mentioned he has a red flag on someone, and did not pursue. His last game, regarding this, doesn't say much, but it does say that he is capable of making cases and establishing arguments, something in which he has not done this game yet, despite accusing someone of being highly suspicious.
Yes he is capable of making cases, but he didn't in the early game of his townie games. That's more of a mid-game thing for him, and I don't think it's indicative of his alignment.
While I lean town on him, it doesn't mean that I'm letting him off the hook by any means. I just think his behavior so far is not indicative of his alignment, and this is consistent with his meta. I think there's much more we need to hear from him, but I don't think he's extremely scummy or anything like that.
|
On September 07 2012 00:52 Hapahauli wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2012 23:02 DarthPunk wrote:
...
You have not answered me previously so I will ask again. Why are you so intent on defending who you seem to believe to be town Otto? Especially when you have leapt all over other players for far less scummy actions? There is no scum motivation. Think about what the objectives of hard-defending a teammate as mafia are. The goal of hard-defending a teammate is to prevent their lynch. It’s pretty clear that defending someone after they have 20-something votes on them is not going to prevent said lynch, so how can it be a mafia objective? It’s not a mafia objective, it’s screamingly bad townie. By contrast, If the lynch was close between two candidates, hard-defending makes sense from a mafia perspective. It’s not smart, but there’s mafia-motive. Regarding the whole “Mattchew was stupid therefore Ottox could be stupid mafia” – that’s a load of BS. As stated above, there’s a huge difference between stupid and mafia-motivated stupid. So as for your questions: I don’t find Ottox scummy. I see a lot of town motivation (even if stupid) behind his actions.
What town motive do you see?
|
On September 07 2012 00:54 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 00:52 Hapahauli wrote:On September 06 2012 23:02 DarthPunk wrote:
...
You have not answered me previously so I will ask again. Why are you so intent on defending who you seem to believe to be town Otto? Especially when you have leapt all over other players for far less scummy actions? There is no scum motivation. Think about what the objectives of hard-defending a teammate as mafia are. The goal of hard-defending a teammate is to prevent their lynch. It’s pretty clear that defending someone after they have 20-something votes on them is not going to prevent said lynch, so how can it be a mafia objective? It’s not a mafia objective, it’s screamingly bad townie. By contrast, If the lynch was close between two candidates, hard-defending makes sense from a mafia perspective. It’s not smart, but there’s mafia-motive. Regarding the whole “Mattchew was stupid therefore Ottox could be stupid mafia” – that’s a load of BS. As stated above, there’s a huge difference between stupid and mafia-motivated stupid. So as for your questions: I don’t find Ottox scummy. I see a lot of town motivation (even if stupid) behind his actions. What town motive do you see?
Welcome back - where the hell have you been?
Did you not just read my damn post? I told you exactly why it's not scum motivated. The town motivation lies in him questioning a read he believes not to be true. Stupid? Absolutely. But as stated above, NOT mafia motivated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
